Editor’s note: Last Thursday, Judith Miller penned a column for The Wall Street Journal in which she accused the new film Fair Game of pushing “untruths” in its telling of the outing of former CIA agent Valerie Plame. Miller described the film, which focuses on the relationship of Plame and husband Joe Wilson, as “brilliantly acted,” but a “gross distortion of a complicated political saga.” She challenges seven of what she calls the film’s “untruths”; among them, claims that Plame played a “key role” in the CIA’s counterproliferation division, charged with gathering evidence on Iraq’s WMD programs, and that Plame was involved in missions to provide safe havens to Iraqi scientists. Miller also takes issue with a subplot in the film in which Plame, played by Naomi Watts, recruits an Iraqi-American woman to visit her scientist brother in Iraq, where is working on the country’s WMD program. CJR approached Fair Game director Doug Liman (Swingers, Mr and Mrs Smith, The Bourne Identity) for comment. He wrote back with this response to Miller’s piece.
Judith Miller demonstrated in her recent WSJ story about my film, Fair Game, the same cavalier attitude towards the facts that led to her departure from The New York Times in disgrace. And we should never forget that Scooter Libby outed Valerie Plame to Miller in June 2003—more than two weeks before Richard Armitage outed Plame to Novak. Somehow Miller neglected to mention that in her op-ed piece. But she also forgot about that before—in her early grand jury testimony—until she was forced to come clean about it in a subsequent grand jury appearance and under oath at Libby’s trial. Miller’s belated testimony helped convict her “source” Libby, but not until she did everything she could, as a forceful proponent of the war in Iraq, to avoid telling the truth to the American public.
And so here we go again.
Judith Miller writes that her supposed anonymous sources told her that Valerie Plame did not play a “key role” in the CIA’s effort to penetrate Iraq’s presumed WMD program. In truth, Valerie Plame was head of operations for the CIA’s Joint Task Force on Iraq (JTFI). My sources: former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet and U.S. attorney Pat Fitzgerald.
Valerie’s specific actions as head of operations for the JTFI were and still are classified. Valerie Plame, a loyal intelligence officer from a military family, has always honored and continues to honor the secrecy agreement she signed when she joined the Agency more than twenty-five years ago. As filmmakers, we did the best job we could to piece together her activities in covert CIA operations specializing in nuclear counter-proliferation. This is not easy, especially since Valerie was a NOC, a form of deep cover operative with no official ties to the U.S. government. To be drawn into debating what this deep cover operative may or may not have done is to miss the big picture—this was no “glorified secretary” who was outed by the White House. Far from it.
Special Counsel Fitzgerald submitted a memorandum to the district court in the Libby trial spelling out in detail Valerie’s undercover role overseas, covert status, and senior positions at the CIA leading counter-proliferation teams and searching for WMD in Iraq. It is disgraceful that Miller and others like her continue to demean Valerie and the dedicated women and men who serve our country as operations officers and risk their lives to keep armchair warriors like Miller safe from harm.
Regarding the Iraqi scientists that are the focus of a sub-plot in Fair Game, Judith Miller seems to blur the line between opinions and indisputable fact. This much we know to be fact: the CIA made a criminal referral because of Plame’s outing. I doubt that the CIA and its director George Tenet—someone who bent over backwards to protect the Bush Administration—would have allowed that to occur if the consequences to national security weren’t serious and the damage to intelligence operations severe.

I think you need comments from Judith Miller
#1 Posted by Stephen G. Esrati, CJR on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 03:54 PM
Why pick on Judith Miller? Why not look at the coverage of this fictional film in the liberal Washington Post?
It's really hard to feel sorry for Plame and Wilson, since they live like royalty in Santa Fe where they purchased a $1.1 million home a couple of years back.
#2 Posted by DRB, CJR on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 04:14 PM
I agree with previous comments. Judith Miller did not print Plame's name and I would remind, Linman, Scooter Libby was NEVER charged with outing Plame. NO ONE was. It was a media driven fantasy and that's about it. I suspect this is why the move, like Plame book, was not able to recover even the production fees.
#3 Posted by Tipper, CJR on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 07:10 PM
Judith brought herself up, no one asked her for her opinion except the neo-con jack offs at the Washington Post.
And if Bradley Miller deserves to go to jail for his breaking of protocol, then so did Cheney, Libby, Armitage, and Rove for not resecting the confidentiality their security clearances, if not their positions in office, demand.
And whether or not they purchased a home or not based on their previous service with the government, that does not justify putting their contacts and lives in danger by blowing her covert company's cover.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Jennings_%26_Associates
(Every employee of that company who was working for the CIA had their covers and contacts blown too. It was extremely crappy way for Cheney to retaliate and totally in character for a man who considers farm raised quail "Fair Game")
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 11:08 PM
Bradley Manning, not Miller. Stupid brain, can't say "Sally sells sea shells by the sea shore." neither.
#5 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 11:13 PM
@DRB
1. The Washington Post is hardly a "liberal" newspaper. At most they have a few liberal columnists, but the vast majority of their editorial staff is conservative.
2. Have you read the article? It's a direct response to Judith Miller lying in her WaPo op-ed (the very fact that the WaPo gave a Bush-mouthpiece like Miller belies your "liberal" assertion).
Miller, in her op-ed:
1. Did not disclose her own conflict of interest in the matter, as she was a prime participant where she tried to protect Libby.
2. Lied about Plame's status at the CIA. The public, published record is quite clear on that matter, within and without the court transcripts. Plame's status at the CIA (as a NOC and as a key figure on the Iraqi WMD issue) was NEVER challenged by the Bush Administration in any official way; instead, the government went on a whispering campaign passing talking points to their mouthpieces at the NYT (such as Miller), the WaPo and Fox News.
Also, the fact that they bought a house worth 1.1 million means nothing, and is nothing but an ad-hominem designed to discredit people you can't discredit using something we call facts.
#6 Posted by DR, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 11:05 AM
Leave it to the Murdoch paper of record to present a failed journalist like Miller without requiring any fact checking or corrections. Opinions are of course just that. Miller remains a mouthpiece for neo-con ideology. Her whining in the WSJ is merely the latest bleating.
As to the Plames owning a home in Santa Fe being somehow relevant...another example of ad hominem attacks by ideologues who're confronted with facts and reality that don't jibe with their halluncinations.
#7 Posted by RB Shea, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 11:36 AM
I give this post a grade of C-
long intro
does not clearly enumerate what facts miller got wrong, in a numbered or bullet point list, and why they are wrong
#8 Posted by ezra abrams, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 11:56 AM
"It's really hard to feel sorry for Plame and Wilson, since they live like royalty in Santa Fe where they purchased a $1.1 million home a couple of years back."
Why do you hate rich people?
The fact is, Valerie Plame was outed. She had been a loyal CIA agent for 25 years and loved her job. Even though she and her husband may be "rich," that doesn't mean that Ms. Plame wanted to give up her job she had held for so long.
#9 Posted by MillerJ, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 12:17 PM
So Bradley Manning is being tortured at Quantico and Julian Assange awaits his dark ops assassination for exposing the very Empire-building skills that Cheney, Libby, Rove, and Armitage used in arguably treasonous fashion, while Miller works overtime to keep her drowning voice heard. Just wanted to be clear that all was well in the ol'USofA!
#10 Posted by Bot Warble, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 12:34 PM
To clear up some facts, please see clips from my story "Unfair Game: How the Media Played Valerie Plame." The entire story is in the documentary film "Broadcast Blues" at http://www.suewilsonreports.com . It's also on Russia Today: http://rt.com/programs/documentary/broadcast-blues/
#11 Posted by Sue Wilson, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 03:08 PM
Why pick on Judith "I was fucking right" Miller. Because she is drowning in the Iraqi and American soldiers blood and she is such a sociopath that she has not even noticed. The woman belongs n an orange jump suit in a federal prison with Feith, Cheney,Rice, Wolfowitz, Bush,Rumsfeld etc. If there is a hell the devil is building a new wing for these war thugs
#12 Posted by Kathleen, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 03:27 PM
Why is it that a defense of the outing always rests on minimizing the position of Valerie Plame at the CIA? We'd know a lot more for certain if Scooter Libby had not obstructed the investigation and the current administration had not dissuaded Spain from prosecuting Bush officials on war crimes. We'd know a lot more if we actually had a free press...guess we'll have to depend on wikileaks.
#13 Posted by mack, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 09:37 PM
I did not read Judith Miller's column in the Wall St Journal though I did read her in the NY Times, but the following quote from the article above, "Judith Miller writes that her supposed anonymous sources told her that Valerie Plame did not play a “key role” in the CIA’s effort to penetrate Iraq’s presumed WMD program" suggests that, according to Miller, the importance of the role someone plays, real or perceived, in a covert operation speaks to the gravity of their claim to protection.
How extraordinary. It is like a sentence "they rolled over Maude with a truck but anonymous sources have testified she was only a secretary,so it;s OK" I believe that Judith Miller would write such a sentence and that the Wall St. Journal would print it,
#14 Posted by C. Keith, CJR on Wed 15 Dec 2010 at 09:50 PM
I don't know if this will get anyone else angry but it makes me goddamned so.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/12/15/thug-nation/
"From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day—for seven straight months and counting—he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he’s barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he’s being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch)... Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not “like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole,” but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.
In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America’s Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything. And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig’s medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation."
Arrest the guy. Try him. Put him in jail. He broke the law, therefore he serves the time when he gets caught.
His actions destroyed his life, but the government's actions are destroying his mind. Unacceptable. Unforgivable. America does not torture, Americans do. And they get away with it.
Libby had his sentence commuted. Armitage retired with honor. Cheney and his proxy daughter are still on TV, and they're all proud of their soulless selves.
Manning's in a room, 7 months and counting, 23 hours a day.
Civilized countries do not behave this way.
#15 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 16 Dec 2010 at 01:17 AM
What Thimbles said! If you doubt that we live in a police state, try, just try, to oppose this 'government' in any meaningful way. You cannot do it. The fact that almost no one does anymore speaks volumes.
#16 Posted by Alice de Tocqueville, CJR on Thu 16 Dec 2010 at 08:42 AM
Something I was reminded of just recently, this isn't the only time the Bushies used exposed anonymity as a weapon. Rumsfeld got to deliver a shot to Joe Darby for blowing the whistle on Abu Grahib in a nationally televised congressional hearing.
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/200608/joe-darby-abu-ghraib
There is no redemption for these people. They leaked* to lie and leaked to punish. The purpose of security is to protect what is valuable, such as the lives that were entrusted to the president's protection. They used is as a weapon for the president's advantage, hiding behind it like they do 9-11.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-december-13-2010/lame-as-f--k-congress
Pathetic.
*Selectively, very selectively.
#17 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 16 Dec 2010 at 09:39 PM
Judith Miller has no longer any credibility as a journalist. She proved herself to be a willing tool of those intent in invading iraq on the basis of false claims. If she has anything to say, let her say it to the hundreds of thosands of dead iraqis her lies and misrepresentations have caused. Loading the gun is the same as pulling the trigger.
#18 Posted by Karl Imhof, CJR on Sun 19 Dec 2010 at 07:20 AM
Childhood is the most beautiful time in everyone's life, representing the age of innocence and candor. And game play are elements of childhood, give them charm, representing a way in which children can discover the world and also the wonderful things that childhood can offer. These elements are very closely interlinked in a connection: through play, children discover the world, and adults go back to childhood, rediscovering the innocence of that age. Because of this the game became adjacent to other topics, namely childhood. jocuri pentru copii
The reason the game is found in many works of great writers, but each of them shows us her vision of childhood: some writers such as Ion Creanga, Mihai Eminescu, Tudor Arghezi Mark Twain sketches in their works a happy childhood, carefree, in the main concerns are playing the game and when other writers like John Teodoreanu George Cosbuc Toparceanu George, has a sad childhood in which children are shown the difficulties and responsibilities of life too early, it's becoming stressful for them.
#19 Posted by Criseeleroins, CJR on Wed 9 Mar 2011 at 12:54 AM